David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 22:28:40 +0000
>
>> An AF_UNIX datagram socket being the client in an n:1 association with
>> some server socket is only allowed to send messages to the server if the
>> receive queue of this socket contains at most sk_max_ack_backlog
>> datagrams.
[...]
>> Signed-off-by: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Fixes: ec0d215f9420 ("af_unix: fix 'poll for write'/connected DGRAM sockets")
>
> So because of a corner case of epoll handling and sender socket release,
> every single datagram sendmsg has to do a double lock now?
>
> I do not dispute the correctness of your fix at this point, but that
> added cost in the fast path is really too high.
This leaves only the option of a somewhat incorrect solution and what is
or isn't acceptable in this respect is somewhat difficult to decide. The
basic options would be
- return EAGAIN even if sending became possible (Jason's most
recent suggestions)
- retry sending a limited number of times, eg, once, before
returning EAGAIN, on the grounds that this is nicer to the
application and that redoing all the stuff up to the _lock in
dgram_sendmsg can possibly/ likely be avoided
Which one do you prefer?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
